Re: [azsecularhumanists] media claim President Hussein had a sorcerer
>In traditional Islamic doctrine aside from the animals
>and plants and God, of course, there are three kinds
>of beings: angels, humans, and jinn ("genies" in the
>corruped Latin-ised version of the word.)
>Angels are like messengers of God and cannot sin.
Interesting difference. Catholicism teaches that angels
have free will and that the bad angels are in hell with
>Animals likewise are by nature doing God's will andThe Christian Science people feel like that about
>are good (though some are unclean or dangerous, but
>morally they are not bad).
>Humans and jinn, however have the ability to choose
>right from wrong. Humans are made of "clay"; the jinn
>from "flame of fire". In terms of language, the word
>jinn comes from a root meaning "unseen." The common
>word for "crazy" - majnoon - comes from the same root
>(j-n-n) and literally means "posessed by jinn."
>So the jinn are unseen beings made of some intangible
>stuff. Satan is one of the Jinn (not an angel, since
>angels can't sin and therefore can't "fall.")
>Magic is associated with the jinn. Usually, I think,
>it involves people seeking the help of jinn. That is
>not necessarily satanic, but it is "risky" because it
>is commonly believed that although most people choose
>to be good, most jinn choose to be bad, and therefore
>seeking their help might involve satan and might
>result in lies anyway, regardless of what you "find
>out." (This is a nice built-in explanation for magic
>not working when it doesn't: the jinn were being
>deceptive, as they usually are.)
>So magic is a bit like dealing with the criminal
>underworld; you think you're getting a loan but you
>might end up with your kneecaps shot off or just plain
>dead. With magic, of course, there's the threat of
>Pious Muslims just pray if they need supernatural
>help. God is One, and so ultimately He can make stuff
>work out for you or not. Magic and jinn are still
>subject to the ultimate control of God even if He
>sometimes allows them to screw around.
>The fundamentalist types might also say that to deal
>in magic is in a sense denying God's allpowerfulness,
>or at least doubting it. That would be really bad,
>except that it isn't quite that, any more than it
>would be if you asked a doctor for help with your
>medical problems or a mechanic to help with your car.
consulting doctors, though I don't know what they
think about consulting mechanics.
>Therefore, dealing with magic is not (from a standardYes, there was something about that in the article.
>religious point of view) exactly the same as turning
>into some sort of satanist. But it's unwise and
>spiritually rather like dealing with gangsters, i.e.,
>carries a spiritual risk, you might get involved in a
>lot more than you bargained for, etc. Besides which
>whatever the jinn do for you might be a lie and
>So a good Muslim trusts in God and doesn't dabble in
>That, I think, is more how the common folk might look
>There was one element in that story about the
>sorcerer, though, that I thought very unlikely (i.e.,
>impossible). Somewhere didn't that old man say that
>Saddam Hussein had some golden statuettes "protecting"
>him? Now that really sounds like idol worship and
>seems highly unlikely to me. Any allegations about
>statues sound made up, unless Ibrahim or somebody has
>heard about them.
Apparently they had something to do with President
Hussein being able to contact the king and queen of the
>More common charms might be some little vial with someYes, it could be that Washington is offering to stop
>bits of paper on which are Qur'an verses or something.
> The religious scholars would say that's in no way
>necessary, but they can't object to the Qur'an.
>While on the subject of religion, al-Quds al-Arabi
>reports that the Iraqi Shiite imam Muqtadi as-Sadr
>called on Friday (today) for the Shiite religious
>council al-Hawzah al-'Ilmiyah to take over running
>Iraq since the Americans seem unable to do so.
>Muqtadi as-Sadr earlier called for resistance to the
>Americans and for establishing a guerrilla group but
>he has since backtracked and now is not for opposition
>and although he still wants that Jaysh al-Mahdi (army
>of the Mahdi) to be formed, he insists it must be
>Meanwhile the US has called on the moderate Shi'a to
>oppose and Muqtadi as-Sadr and try to thwart his
>For his part the Shiite Ayatullah Baqir al-Hakim, head
>of the Supreme Council of the Islamic Revolution of
>Iraq (a pro-Iran group that led the 1991 "uprising")
>called on all Islamic countries to recognize the US
>appointed governing council of Iraq the way Iran has
>done. His brother, by the way, is on that US
>Overall, it looks as though the Shiite clergy types
>are moving closer to some sort of modus vivendi with
>the Americans. Meanwhile Washington has officially
>declared the political wing of the Mujahidi-Khalq to
>be a terrorist organization. The Mujahidi-Khalq are a
>kind of Islamic Marxist movement that took part in the
>Iranian revolution but then were criminalized by the
>Mullas. For decades they operated as an opposition
>group with military bases in Iraq. It was said that
>they helped out the US during the invasion, but now
>not only their armed branch but also their political
>wing (whose "terrorism" would therefore consist of
>issuing leaflets and making speeches) is regarded by
>the US as a "terrorist group."
>This all sounds like Washington is doing some sort of
>a deal with Iran.
supporting the "reformers" in exchange for cooperation
with Iraq. Despicable but plausible.